Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KewQuorum/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets




Evidence submitted by Atama
I was drawn to this issue by a post at the conflict of interest noticeboard, where a concern was raised that the Peter Maple article was being edited by persons who had a conflict of interest. In fact, Maplep has self-identified as Peter Maple. All three editors are single-purpose accounts, having only contributed to Wikipedia to either edit the Maple article, or promote Peter Maple in other articles.

This is all troubling enough, but the worst violation of WP:SOCK is on the talk page of the Maple article, where all 3 accounts have engaged each other in a conversation to back each other up and attempt to form a false consensus as to the neutrality of the article and whether or not the inclusion of links to blogs and social networking sites are allowable (no surprise, they agree with each other that it is okay). --  At am a  頭 21:05, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Rees11 added HughAlexander to the list above, another SPA who appeared at the Peter Maple article. -- At am a  頭 17:19, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Being new to Wikipedia it's not surprising that these are my only entries. I created the Peter Maple page as a colleague and admirer, not as the same person. I asked him to comment about the blog which he did. James Peters is known to me and is like minded so the remarks are complimentary. If we've contravened Widipedia protocol then sorry but do feel the entry is valid. Again still learning how to reference effectively non Wiki sources.

KewQuorum (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Self-endorsing for CheckUser attention, if anything, do determine if it is meatpuppetry (which, if is, wouldn't necessarily be blockable in this case) or otherwise straight socking. –MuZemike 20:39, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Technical evidence indicates that these accounts are all being controlled by the same person. J.delanoy gabs adds  03:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions
All accounts indefinitely blocked and tagged. –MuZemike 16:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)